The Conservative Cave
The Bar => Sports => Topic started by: ChuckJ on May 20, 2014, 05:29:30 PM
-
Any horse racing fans around? What are you're thought on the upcoming Belmont?
-
I'm hoping Cali Chrome (somewhat local to me) pulls it off. :hyper:
-
I am. I hope CC pulls it off but I'm just not sure I'd put money on it.
-
I'm rooting for CalChrome also. I've seen many discounting him because his times in the Derby and the Preakness were not world-shattering, but I'm wondering if that's just the sign of a good and experienced jockey not using up his horse. Maybe the jockey just let him run as fast as he needed to run to win.
If I understand correctly, this horse is supposed to have Secretariat in his bloodline. Secretariat was great horse. A one in a million. While I'm not expecting anything close to Secretariat maybe in the Belmont the genes will show through and he'll move like a tremendous machine.
-
The owners really got a good deal. I think that i read the mother was worth $8k, the father $2k. He's just the feel good all American story. I'm really hoping that he wins.
Last year on the way back from St Louis we stopped at the Kentucky Horse Farm. The former racers that they brought into the little ampitheater for tourists were so gorgeous, old horses who still had that fire in the belly.
I never bet on the horses, but love watching them run.
-
The only horses I bet on were the Trotters (Harness Racing). My favorite back-in-the day was Lizard Lips.
Damn horse never won.
-
I'm hoping we get another Triple Crown winner. It sure has been a long time!
-
Reminder....
Belmont Stakes, third race in the Triple Crown will be Saturday, June 7th.
Post time is 6:30 P.M. ET. Will be televised on NBC.
If California Chrome should win, he would be only the 12th U.S. Triple Crown winner. A horse hasn't won since Affirmed did in 1978.
-
Sadly, I won't be able to watch it. I'll be on the road. :p
-
Reminder....
Belmont Stakes, third race in the Triple Crown will be Saturday, June 7th.
Post time is 6:30 P.M. ET. Will be televised on NBC.
If California Chrome should win, he would be only the 12th U.S. Triple Crown winner. A horse hasn't won since Affirmed did in 1978.
Thanks... I was going to ask who was the last winner.
Sad I remember that.
Me, I am rooting for Stewball (even if his story was told by a bunch of liberal idiots)...
-
Reminder.. Race starts in about an hour.
-
Watched and was glad that CC did not win because the owners are trash. The big fat one with the white mustache stated that the folks in NY know how to treat them compared to what he got at the Kentucky Derby. He also dissed Kentucky bred horses. To top it off the sorry bastard is a bad losers calling the owners of Tonalist cowards for not running their horse in the Preakness and Kentucky Derby. He said it twice on TV. What a sorry POS the owner of CC is.
CC jockey made a fatal mistake by allowing himself to be boxed in and wound up having to go wide. When the fastest horse on the track runs at the #2 post, that is not supposed to happen IMO.
-
^^^ I had wanted to believe the feel good story. But their true colors came out in the end. *sigh*
They are not horsemen. They just got lucky with an ill-conformed colt.
-
I'm bummed, and I understand the owners disappointment, but rules are rules, and he knew that going in. He should have kept his mouth shut.
Running a horse three times in five weeks in three different states is hard on the horse. That's why there have only been 12 winners in a hundred years, and not one since 1978.
-
I’ve got to disagree with y’all a bit.
I think Chrome is a good horse. Even good horses can lose. It’s happened for 36 years before today.
While the owner’s words were harsh, for the last week many journalists have been saying that the horses that skipped the Derby and/or the Preakness would have an advantage. I even have to agree with him to a degree about requiring the horses to run all the races.
You also have to remember that he got a microphone stuck in his face immediately after emotionally going from the mountain top to the bottom of the valley. That’s not always a good time to get a diplomatic statement from someone.
I do think the jockey could have done a better job this go around. I’m sure he’ll be second guessing himself for awhile.
I suspected the race was over when they exited turn two. I pretty much know the race was over when they exited turn three.
Despite what happened, I still like the horse. I think he did a good job. He’s earned more money in 5 weeks than many will in a life time.
-
Despite what happened, I still like the horse. I think he did a good job. He’s earned more money in 5 weeks than many will in a life time.
Stud fees ought to bring CC a might hefty penny later, which is where the big money is, isn't it? (I know nothing about horse racing.)
-
Stud fees ought to bring CC a might hefty penny later, which is where the big money is, isn't it? (I know nothing about horse racing.)
He's a California horse.
They'll probably find out he's gay.
-
I’ve got to disagree with y’all a bit.
I think Chrome is a good horse. Even good horses can lose. It’s happened for 36 years before today.
While the owner’s words were harsh, for the last week many journalists have been saying that the horses that skipped the Derby and/or the Preakness would have an advantage. I even have to agree with him to a degree about requiring the horses to run all the races.
You also have to remember that he got a microphone stuck in his face immediately after emotionally going from the mountain top to the bottom of the valley. That’s not always a good time to get a diplomatic statement from someone.
I do think the jockey could have done a better job this go around. I’m sure he’ll be second guessing himself for awhile.
I suspected the race was over when they exited turn two. I pretty much know the race was over when they exited turn three.
Despite what happened, I still like the horse. I think he did a good job. He’s earned more money in 5 weeks than many will in a life time.
If CC had won the race, do you think he would be spouting this BS about it not being fair, the other horses are rested up, they did not run in the other two races, mine had more BM's than yours, etc., etc.???? Coburn is a sore loser and his jockey lost the race by going to the outside when he started out on the inside lane.
-
The fact that you have to win all 3 races to obtain the triple crown isn't fair? Is that what he was saying? Sounds like the DUmp! It seems to me if you race the same horse's in every race there would be a triple crown winner every year. :loser:
-
If CC had won the race, do you think he would be spouting this BS about it not being fair, the other horses are rested up, they did not run in the other two races, mine had more BM's than yours, etc., etc.???? Coburn is a sore loser and his jockey lost the race by going to the outside when he started out on the inside lane.
Of course he wouldn't be saying the same thing if Chrome had won. He wouldn't be ranting at all. By the same token, if instead of interviewing him immediately after his horse lost while the emotions were still high and the cut was still hurting, they would have waited a few days he would probably have given a much more diplomatic interview.
Also, from what I've seen, these guys aren't like the other owners in the race. They appear to view this horse similar to a family pet. You know how people get with their family pets.
All I'm saying is the guy is just human.
As for his BS about it not being fair and the other horse being rested, there is apparently a degree of truth to it. Before I go any further, please notice that I didn't say it was against the rules nor did I say that anyone cheated. I'm not a horse expert so I have no idea, personally, of how time between races affects a horse; however, it must make some difference or various owners would not have chosen to skip races to rest their horses. If so, while I wouldn't have used the term "not fair", it does mean that the playing field wasn't exactly level as far as this particular race went.
Granted, they all had the option of choosing to rest their horse in order to win a particular race instead of attempting the triple crown. The rules are the rules; however, I do agree with him that with the rules as they are we will probably never see another triple crown winner in his life time. At least unless another horse with the speed and stamina of Secretariat comes along.
I will make a deal with you. If you're willing to give him just a little bit of slack for that one interview, I'll be more than willing to say you're right and that he's a sore loser AND an asshole if he's still giving the same type of interview by the end of the week.
-
The fact that you have to win all 3 races to obtain the triple crown isn't fair? Is that what he was saying? Sounds like the DUmp! It seems to me if you race the same horse's in every race there would be a triple crown winner every year. :loser:
No, he wasn't say that the fact that you have to win all 3 races to win the triple crown was unfair. He was saying that it's unfair that some owners/trainers skip one or two of the triple crown races in order to focus on one particular race which means that any horse running all three races are facing fresher horses.
It's not really unfair because it's within the current rules, but it apparently does result in an uneven playing field for the horses running all three races.
-
Stud fees ought to bring CC a might hefty penny later, which is where the big money is, isn't it? (I know nothing about horse racing.)
That's what I would do with him. They saw something in his lineage, that's why they bred him, maybe they'll get lucky and get a whole string of winners.
CC had won his last five races even before going to the Kentucky Derby. He is a great horse.
-
Of course he wouldn't be saying the same thing if Chrome had won. He wouldn't be ranting at all. By the same token, if instead of interviewing him immediately after his horse lost while the emotions were still high and the cut was still hurting, they would have waited a few days he would probably have given a much more diplomatic interview.
Also, from what I've seen, these guys aren't like the other owners in the race. They appear to view this horse similar to a family pet. You know how people get with their family pets.
All I'm saying is the guy is just human.
As for his BS about it not being fair and the other horse being rested, there is apparently a degree of truth to it. Before I go any further, please notice that I didn't say it was against the rules nor did I say that anyone cheated. I'm not a horse expert so I have no idea, personally, of how time between races affects a horse; however, it must make some difference or various owners would not have chosen to skip races to rest their horses. If so, while I wouldn't have used the term "not fair", it does mean that the playing field wasn't exactly level as far as this particular race went.
Granted, they all had the option of choosing to rest their horse in order to win a particular race instead of attempting the triple crown. The rules are the rules; however, I do agree with him that with the rules as they are we will probably never see another triple crown winner in his life time. At least unless another horse with the speed and stamina of Secretariat comes along.
I will make a deal with you. If you're willing to give him just a little bit of slack for that one interview, I'll be more than willing to say you're right and that he's a sore loser AND an asshole if he's still giving the same type of interview by the end of the week.
Sorry but I am not willing to give him any slack because after he had won the Kentucky Derby he goes up to NY and insults the people at Churchill Downs. He states that these people in NY know how to treat us. He even pokes fun at KY bred horses. IMO, he is an ungrateful low class loud mouth red neck. I live in the South and have several very good red neck friends.
I started playing amateur tournament golf when I was 12. Usually with adults and I can remember the first time I lost a match. It hurt but I still shook hands and congratulated the winner. Don't think Coburn's parents taught him any better. Once again, he deserves no slack in my book and he acts like a know it all Yankee.
I am not a race horse expert either. There are a number of reasons why an owner will skip a race. Could be the health of the horse. Not performing up to snuff. Track not suited for the horse or one that is. Personel issues. Horses being scratched a few min. before post time is not unusual. Owner bring the horse, trainer, jockey to the track and something happens that they feel it is not in the best interest of the horse to run that race. It happens hundreds of times throughout the US in a single year.
-
To me its apples to oranges. If a horse don't run in all 3 races it can't win the triple crown. So you whine that another horse that can't possibly win the crown beat your horse. What does that mean? Said horse is a spoiler? That is what make it such an amazing accomplishment. The whine is ridiculous, like everyone should get a trophy for just participating!
-
Sorry but I am not willing to give him any slack because after he had won the Kentucky Derby he goes up to NY and insults the people at Churchill Downs. He states that these people in NY know how to treat us. He even pokes fun at KY bred horses. IMO, he is an ungrateful low class loud mouth red neck. I live in the South and have several very good red neck friends.
I started playing amateur tournament golf when I was 12. Usually with adults and I can remember the first time I lost a match. It hurt but I still shook hands and congratulated the winner. Don't think Coburn's parents taught him any better. Once again, he deserves no slack in my book and he acts like a know it all Yankee.
I am not a race horse expert either. There are a number of reasons why an owner will skip a race. Could be the health of the horse. Not performing up to snuff. Track not suited for the horse or one that is. Personel issues. Horses being scratched a few min. before post time is not unusual. Owner bring the horse, trainer, jockey to the track and something happens that they feel it is not in the best interest of the horse to run that race. It happens hundreds of times throughout the US in a single year.
I didn’t hear or read about his making fun of the Kentucky Bred horses. Without hearing it in context, I’d have to say that I’d chastise him about that. I did, however, read his comments about their poor treatment at Churchill Downs. Honestly, I initially took it to be an asshole comment from someone who expected to be treated like royalty and wasn’t; however, I later read comments from others (including a former worker at CD) who said that the tract sometimes treat those considered as “outsiders†with less enthusiasm. So I don’t have any idea if he was really slighted or if he was just being a sour apple and supporters and/or disgruntled from track employees were lying to back him up. I do admit the fact that the incident, whether real or imagined, was brought up adds to his potential assholery.
While I realize that there are hundreds of races that horses sit out of we are not talking about them. We are talking about these three specific races that make up the Triple Crown. Since Chrome’s owner made his comments I’ve seen horse racing commentators, who know more about racing that me and maybe you, who have agreed with the owner that there are problems with how the Triple Crown is run. Keep in mind, they didn’t agree with HOW he said it, but they did agree with the main idea. One commentator, and I admit is the only article that I actual read instead of scanned through, wrote that the best thing to do would be to extend the break between the races which would allow any horse attempting all three races to be more rested. I think that would be a good move.
For the record, from an AP article here ( http://sports.yahoo.com/news/california-chrome-heads-home-bandaged-foot-162108003--spt.html ) are comments the owner made the day AFTER the race:
"It's not fair to these horses that are running to entertain these people in all three legs of the Triple Crown," he said. "It's not fair to them to have somebody just show up at the last minute and run. I may have gone off half-cocked yesterday, but that's the way I feel."
You’ll notice that even one day after the event he’s less inflammatory and admits that he may have gone off half-cocked.
From the same article, I think his trainer it best:
"Horses aren't cowards and the people aren't cowards," he said. "He was at the heat of the moment. Don't forget he's a fairly new owner. Sometimes your emotions get in front of you. He hasn't been in the game long and hasn't had any bad luck."
I'm more than willing to concede that he may be an asshole (a term I prefer over loud mouthed redneck). I just don't think that comments made in the heat of the moment is the best basis on which to judge assholery. If so, 99% of NASCAR drivers would be considered assholes.
-
The triple crown is nearly insurmountable. 3 different tracks, 3 different race lengths, 3 different surfaces, all within a compressed time period. Winning any leg of the 3 is an accomplishment. Going into the 3rd leg with 2 wins is fantastic. The horse who wins 2 of the 3 already will make a fortune for it's owners and is guaranteed to be a hall of famer and be a big part of many other champion's bloodlines.
It just may be too much to ask of any horse unless they are a breakaway superstar like previous triple crown winners were.
-
I'm bummed, and I understand the owners disappointment, but rules are rules, and he knew that going in. He should have kept his mouth shut.
Running a horse three times in five weeks in three different states is hard on the horse. That's why there have only been 12 winners in a hundred years, and not one since 1978.
Well, having lived in No. Cal my whole life, and only 45 min from Yuba City...................I'm not surprised. Much like the maligned Rio Linda (Rush Limbaugh) there's a reason why.
-
I didn’t hear or read about his making fun of the Kentucky Bred horses. Without hearing it in context, I’d have to say that I’d chastise him about that. I did, however, read his comments about their poor treatment at Churchill Downs. Honestly, I initially took it to be an asshole comment from someone who expected to be treated like royalty and wasn’t; however, I later read comments from others (including a former worker at CD) who said that the tract sometimes treat those considered as “outsiders†with less enthusiasm. So I don’t have any idea if he was really slighted or if he was just being a sour apple and supporters and/or disgruntled from track employees were lying to back him up. I do admit the fact that the incident, whether real or imagined, was brought up adds to his potential assholery.
While I realize that there are hundreds of races that horses sit out of we are not talking about them. We are talking about these three specific races that make up the Triple Crown. Since Chrome’s owner made his comments I’ve seen horse racing commentators, who know more about racing that me and maybe you, who have agreed with the owner that there are problems with how the Triple Crown is run. Keep in mind, they didn’t agree with HOW he said it, but they did agree with the main idea. One commentator, and I admit is the only article that I actual read instead of scanned through, wrote that the best thing to do would be to extend the break between the races which would allow any horse attempting all three races to be more rested. I think that would be a good move.
For the record, from an AP article here ( http://sports.yahoo.com/news/california-chrome-heads-home-bandaged-foot-162108003--spt.html ) are comments the owner made the day AFTER the race:
"It's not fair to these horses that are running to entertain these people in all three legs of the Triple Crown," he said. "It's not fair to them to have somebody just show up at the last minute and run. I may have gone off half-cocked yesterday, but that's the way I feel."
You’ll notice that even one day after the event he’s less inflammatory and admits that he may have gone off half-cocked.
From the same article, I think his trainer it best:
"Horses aren't cowards and the people aren't cowards," he said. "He was at the heat of the moment. Don't forget he's a fairly new owner. Sometimes your emotions get in front of you. He hasn't been in the game long and hasn't had any bad luck."
I'm more than willing to concede that he may be an asshole (a term I prefer over loud mouthed redneck). I just don't think that comments made in the heat of the moment is the best basis on which to judge assholery. If so, 99% of NASCAR drivers would be considered assholes.
So what if a few commentators want to change the time span in between races. They do not set the dates or make the rules. Their opinions do not agree with mine. I think how the races are run are just fine. It would be like Michael Phelps complaining that I swam two races in a row and this other competitor ran zero;so, I should have more time to compete in a third race. It does not work like that. If any owner wants to compete for the Triple Crown he/she has to follow tradition/rules that have been in place for many years. Political correctness about it not being fair because horses xyz did not run in the other two races is just a bunch of horse shit IMO.
I will concede that the owner was not treated like royalty at Churchill Downs. He comes off as big loud mouth. That does not set well with most people. However, was his horse denied anything that the other horses got. I do not think so. The race is about the horse not someone with a big ego. The fact that he was a newcomer does not excuse his bad behavior either.
-
I saw a lot of interviews with him after the Kentucky Derby. He didn't come off as an ass then. He just seemed like a happy go regular guy.
But he is a newcomer. Probably out of his element with all the big money horse breeders in the circuit, and no surprise they would snub him. I'll also bet there is a back story to that crowd, where it was no secret they wanted to end California Chrome's chances and put the old fart in his place.
The story of California Chrome is like a Cinderella story. Two old guys breed a horse for 10 grand, while others are spending ten times that on just stud service, trying to get a good race horse. Even their trainer, was an old jocky, 77, they found selling tickets at a race track.
-
So what if a few commentators want to change the time span in between races. They do not set the dates or make the rules. Their opinions do not agree with mine. I think how the races are run are just fine. It would be like Michael Phelps complaining that I swam two races in a row and this other competitor ran zero;so, I should have more time to compete in a third race. It does not work like that. If any owner wants to compete for the Triple Crown he/she has to follow tradition/rules that have been in place for many years. Political correctness about it not being fair because horses xyz did not run in the other two races is just a bunch of horse shit IMO.
I will concede that the owner was not treated like royalty at Churchill Downs. He comes off as big loud mouth. That does not set well with most people. However, was his horse denied anything that the other horses got. I do not think so. The race is about the horse not someone with a big ego. The fact that he was a newcomer does not excuse his bad behavior either.
I don't think political correctness had anything to do with it. If it did, I wouldn't even be arguing with you.
By the way, I do appreciate that fact that we've been arguing all of this time and not a bitchslap has occurred. At DU they'd have already broken the alert button. :-)
Back to the matter at hand, the opinions of the commentators are just as valid as yours and mine regardless of whether or not they agree with you. Maybe more so since some of them are either former jockeys or other professions within the business.
I will, however, agree with you that changing the schedule would be a change of tradition and that would concern me a bit.
We'll just have to agree to disagree about the owner. While I have seen enough out of him to agree the "loud mouth" label fits (I think he'd even agree to that), I have not seen enough of him to use the label in a belligerent (aka he's an asshole) way.
-
Just a little off-topic. It seems like no one really cares about the Belmont stakes unless one of the horses that is running has already won the Preakness and the Kentucky Derby. In fact, I rarely hear about the Preakness winner unless they are running in the Derby.
Isn't the Derby really the crown jewel of racing?
-
Just a little off-topic. It seems like no one really cares about the Belmont stakes unless one of the horses that is running has already won the Preakness and the Kentucky Derby. In fact, I rarely hear about the Preakness winner unless they are running in the Derby.
Isn't the Derby really the crown jewel of racing?
I don't know if I'd exactly say that no one really cares about it, but you are correct that it seems that the Derby is THE race.
-
I don't know if I'd exactly say that no one really cares about it, but you are correct that it seems that the Derby is THE race.
Up until the Derby was ran and won, I'd never heard who had won the Preakness.
-
Up until the Derby was ran and won, I'd never heard who had won the Preakness.
Even back when I used to watch races regularly I really didn't keep up with who won except for the 85 (I think) Preakness. Something about the fire that a horse named Tank's Prospect was showing as they led him to the starting gate caught my eye. He ended up winning the race in near record time. Sadly, he broke down in the Belmont.
-
It all had the makings of a good story but then the horse and the owner let us down.....but mostly the owner. The horse did his best, the owner didn't.
-
It all had the makings of a good story but then the horse and the owner let us down.....but mostly the owner. The horse did his best, the owner didn't.
I'm wondering what kind of difference the injury to the hoof made in his run. When I first glanced at the photos I thought it was just a scratch, but later I heard some claiming it actually took a chunk out of him.